An Endemic Plant and the Plant-Insect Visitor Network of a Dune Ecosystem
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Diptera: Bombyliidae and Syrphidae) Floral Foraging Fidelity in Subalpine Meadows
Effects of Floral Diversity and Density on Fly (Diptera: Bombyliidae and Syrphidae) Floral Foraging Fidelity in Subalpine Meadows Student: Nelson Vila-Santana Mentor: Berry Brosi and Heather Briggs Advanced Independent Research Summer 2012 Abstract: Foraging behavior of pollinators is an extensively researched topic. Research on bee, butterfly, and hummingbird foraging behavior has led to a greater understanding of the impacts of plant community composition on foraging behavior. This research has been further enhanced by fly foraging behavior and its importance in ecosystems. In order to determine the relationship flies have with the plant community we are examining the effects of flower species diversity and conspecific floral density on fly (Diptera: Syrphidae and Bombyliidae) foraging fidelity. Fly foraging fidelity was seen to be effected by both of these floral community characteristics. It was observed that as flower species diversity increased we saw a decrease in foraging fidelity. Also as conspecific floral density increased we observed an increase in foraging fidelity. Future topics of interest may involve the impact of these effects, conspecific floral densities and floral species diversity, on plant fitness along with other variables which may impact fly foraging fidelity. Introduction: Extensive research on bee, butterfly, and hummingbird foraging behavior has lead to a greater understanding of the importance of foragers as pollinators and plant community impacts on this foraging. Fly foraging research, however limited, has begun to identify the importance of flies as pollinators (Kearns 2001) With more research we may be able to better understand the importance of Dipteran pollinators. (Kearns 2001). As noted in Kearns et al. -
Spotted Knapweed Centaurea Stoebe Ssp. Micranthos (Gugler) Hayek
spotted knapweed Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos (Gugler) Hayek Synonyms: Acosta maculosa auct. non Holub, Centaurea biebersteinii DC., C. maculosa auct. non Lam, C. maculosa ssp. micranthos G. Gmelin ex Gugler Other common names: None Family: Asteraceae Invasiveness Rank: 86 The invasiveness rank is calculated based on a species’ ecological impacts, biological attributes, distribution, and response to control measures. The ranks are scaled from 0 to 100, with 0 representing a plant that poses no threat to native ecosystems and 100 representing a plant that poses a major threat to native ecosystems. Description Ecological Impact Spotted knapweed is a biennial to short-lived perennial Impact on community composition, structure, and plant. Stems are 30½ to 91 cm tall and generally interactions: Spotted knapweed often forms dense branched. Rosette leaves are compound with several stands in natural communities. Infestations reduce the irregularly lobed segments. Stem leaves are alternate, 5 vigor of native plants, decrease the species diversity of to 15 cm long, more or less hairy, and resin-dotted. plant communities, and degrade the forage quality of Lower stem leaves are narrowly divided, while the wildlife habitats. Winter-ranging elk may avoid foraging upper stem leaves are undivided. Flower heads are 19 to in spotted knapweed dominated communities (Rice et al. 25½ mm wide and are composed of purple disc florets 1997). Knapweeds are allelopathic, inhibiting the (Royer and Dickinson 1999, Whitson et al. 2000). establishment and growth of surrounding vegetation (Whitson et al. 2000). Impact on ecosystem processes: Infestations of spotted knapweed have been shown to increase the erosion of topsoil. -
Supporting Analysis
APPENDIX A Supporting Analysis Table of Contents A.1 PARK SETTING ................................................................................................................................................ 2 A.2 DEMOGRAPHICS ............................................................................................................................................ 4 A.3 HISTORY OF THE LUDINGTON AREA ........................................................................................................... 6 A.4 HISTORY OF LUDINGTON STATE PARK ....................................................................................................... 7 A.5 LAND OWNERSHIP AND ACQUISITIONS ................................................................................................... 10 A.6 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER RECREATION RESOURCES ............................................................................. 13 A.7 LEGAL MANDATES ........................................................................................................................................ 19 A.8 NATURAL SYSTEMS AND NATURAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................... 23 A.9 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 27 A.10 EDUCATION AND INTERPRETATION ......................................................................................................... 30 A.11 RECREATION RESOURCES ......................................................................................................................... -
Native Plant Establishment Success Influenced Yb Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea Stoebe) Control Method
Grand Valley State University ScholarWorks@GVSU Funded Articles Open Access Publishing Support Fund 2014 Native Plant Establishment Success Influenced yb Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe) Control Method Laurelin M. Martin Grand Valley State University Neil W. MacDonald Grand Valley State University, [email protected] Tami E. Brown Grand Valley State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/oapsf_articles Part of the Biology Commons ScholarWorks Citation Martin, Laurelin M.; MacDonald, Neil W.; and Brown, Tami E., "Native Plant Establishment Success Influenced by Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe) Control Method" (2014). Funded Articles. 15. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/oapsf_articles/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Access Publishing Support Fund at ScholarWorks@GVSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Funded Articles by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@GVSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RESEARCH ARTICLE Native Plant Establishment Success Influenced by Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe) Control Method Laurelin M. Martin, Neil W. MacDonald and Tami E. Brown ABSTRACT Invasive species frequently need to be controlled as part of efforts to reestablish native species on degraded sites. While the effectiveness of differing control methods are often reported, the impacts these methods have on the establishment of a native plant community are often unknown. To determine methods that effectively reduce spotted knapweed (Cen- taurea stoebe) while enhancing native species establishment, we tested 12 treatment combinations consisting of an initial site preparation (mowing, mowing + clopyralid, or mowing + glyphosate), in factorial combination with annual adult knapweed hand pulling and/or burning. We established 48 plots and applied site preparation treatments during summer 2008, seeded 23 native forbs and grasses during spring 2009, pulled adult knapweed annually from 2009–2012, and burned in the early spring 2012. -
Milk Thistle
Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF EXOTIC T RU E T HISTL E S RACHEL WINSTON , RICH HANSEN , MA R K SCH W A R ZLÄNDE R , ER IC COO M BS , CA R OL BELL RANDALL , AND RODNEY LY M FHTET-2007-05 U.S. Department Forest September 2008 of Agriculture Service FHTET he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 Tby the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ On the cover: Italian thistle. Photo: ©Saint Mary’s College of California. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for information only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. -
Recovery Strategy for Pitcher's Thistle (Cirsium Pitcheri) in Canada
Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy for Pitcher’s Thistle (Cirsium pitcheri) in CanadaRECOVERY—June 2010 STRATEGY SERIES Recovery Strategy for Pitcher’s Thistle (Cirsium pitcheri) in Canada Pitcher’s Thistle 2011 i Recovery Strategy for Pitcher’s Thistle in Canada 2011 About the Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series What is the Species at Risk Act (SARA)? SARA is the Act developed by the federal government as a key contribution to the common national effort to protect and conserve species at risk in Canada. SARA came into force in 2003 and one of its purposes is “to provide for the recovery of wildlife species that are extirpated, endangered or threatened as a result of human activity.” What is recovery? In the context of species at risk conservation, recovery is the process by which the decline of an endangered, threatened or extirpated species is arrested or reversed, and threats are removed or reduced to improve the likelihood of the species’ persistence in the wild. A species will be considered recovered when its long-term persistence in the wild has been secured. What is a recovery strategy? A recovery strategy is a planning document that identifies what needs to be done to arrest or reverse the decline of a species. It sets goals and objectives and identifies the main areas of activities to be undertaken. Detailed planning is done at the action plan stage. Recovery strategy development is a commitment of all provinces and territories and of three federal agencies — Environment Canada, Parks Canada Agency and Fisheries and Oceans Canada — under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk. -
Multi-Trophic Level Interactions Between the Invasive Plant
MULTI-TROPHIC LEVEL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE INVASIVE PLANT CENTAUREA STOEBE, INSECTS AND NATIVE PLANTS by Christina Rachel Herron-Sweet A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Land Resources and Environmental Sciences MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana May 2014 ©COPYRIGHT by Christina Rachel Herron-Sweet 2014 All Rights Reserved ii DEDICATION To my parents and grandparents, who instilled in me the value of education and have been my biggest supporters along the way. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks go to my two advisers Drs. Jane Mangold and Erik Lehnhoff for all their tremendous support, advice and feedback during my graduate program. My two other committee members Drs. Laura Burkle and Jeff Littlefield also deserve a huge thank you for the time and effort they put into helping me with various aspects of my project. This research would not have been possible without the dedicated crew of field and lab helpers: Torrin Daniels, Darcy Goodson, Daniel France, James Collins, Ann de Meij, Noelle Orloff, Krista Ehlert, and Hally Berg. The following individuals deserve recognition for their patience in teaching me pollinator identification, and for providing parasitoid identifications: Casey Delphia, Mike Simanonok, Justin Runyon, Charles Hart, Stacy Davis, Mike Ivie, Roger Burks, Jim Woolley, David Wahl, Steve Heydon, and Gary Gibson. Hilary Parkinson and Matt Lavin also offered their expertise in plant identification. Statistical advice and R code was generously offered by Megan Higgs, Sean McKenzie, Pamela Santibanez, Dan Bachen, Michael Lerch, Michael Simanonok, Zach Miller and Dave Roberts. Bryce Christiaens, Lyn Huyser, Gil Gale and Craig Campbell provided instrumental consultation on locating field sites, and the Circle H Ranch, Flying D Ranch and the United States Forest Service graciously allowed this research to take place on their property. -
Introduction
PDF file from Evenhuis, N.L. & D.J. Greathead, 1999, World Catalog of Bee Flies (Diptera: Bombyliidae). Backhuys Publishers, Leiden. xlviii + ix 756 pp. INTRODUCTION Bombyliids, or bee flies as they are commonly called, comprise a diverse and speciose assemblage of brachycerous flies. With more than 4,500 species known worldwide, they are one of the largest families of Diptera, surpassed in numbers of species only by the Tipulidae (14,000), Tachinidae (9,200), Syrphidae (5,800), Asilidae (5,600), Ceratopogonidae (5,300), and Dolichopodidae (5,100). They occur in a variety of habitats and ecosystems (from ca. 10 km from the Arctic Ocean in Canada through all latitudes as far south as Tierra del Fuego; and at altitudes from over 3500 m in the Himalayas to 200 m below sea level at the shores of the Dead Sea). They are found on all continents except Antarctica and also many oceanic islands. The family has a remarkable range in size (from some Exoprosopa with wingspans of more than 60 mm to the tiny Apolysis that can be as small as 1.5 mm in length) and variety of shapes (e.g., Systropus mimicking ammophiline wasps; Bombomyia mimic- king bumblebees). The adults of the larger species are powerful and agile fliers, rivaling the syrphid flies in their ability to hover and move in all directions while in flight. With many species possessing colorful patterns of stripes and spots on the wings and bodies, bee flies are often some of the most striking in appearance of all the Diptera. Individuals can often be seen either resting in the open on trails or on rocks or twigs sunning themselves, or feeding on a variety of flowering plants. -
Montana Knapweeds
Biology, Ecology and Management of Montana Knapweeds EB0204 revised August 2017 Celestine Duncan, Consultant, Weed Management Services, Helena, MT Jim Story, Research Professor, retired, MSU Western Ag Research Center, Corvallis, MT Roger Sheley, former MSU Extension Weed Specialist, Bozeman, MT revised by Hilary Parkinson, former MSU Research Associate, and Jane Mangold, MSU Extension Invasive Plant Specialist Table of Contents Plant Biology . 3 SpeedyWeed ID . 5 Ecology . 4 Habitat . 4 Spread and Establishment Potential . 6 Damage Potential . 7 Origins, Current Status and Distribution . 8 Management Alternatives . 8 Prevention . 8 Mechanical Control . .9 Cultural Control . .10 Biological Control . .11 Chemical Control . .14 Integrated Weed Management (IWM) . 16 Additional Resources . 17 Acknowledgements . .19 COVER PHOTOS large - spotted knapweed by Marisa Williams, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, bugwood.org top inset - diffuse knapweed by Cindy Roche, bugwood.org bottom inset - Russain knapweed by Steve Dewey, Utah State University, bugwood.org Any mention of products in this publication does not constitute a recommendation by Montana State University Extension. It is a violation of Federal law to use herbicides in a manner inconsistent with their labeling. Copyright © 2017 MSU Extension The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Montana State University and Montana State University Extension prohibit discrimination in all of their programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital and family status. Issued in furtherance of cooperative extension work in agriculture and home economics, acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Jeff Bader, Director of Extension, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717. -
CHECKLIST of WISCONSIN MOTHS (Superfamilies Mimallonoidea, Drepanoidea, Lasiocampoidea, Bombycoidea, Geometroidea, and Noctuoidea)
WISCONSIN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY SPECIAL PUBLICATION No. 6 JUNE 2018 CHECKLIST OF WISCONSIN MOTHS (Superfamilies Mimallonoidea, Drepanoidea, Lasiocampoidea, Bombycoidea, Geometroidea, and Noctuoidea) Leslie A. Ferge,1 George J. Balogh2 and Kyle E. Johnson3 ABSTRACT A total of 1284 species representing the thirteen families comprising the present checklist have been documented in Wisconsin, including 293 species of Geometridae, 252 species of Erebidae and 584 species of Noctuidae. Distributions are summarized using the six major natural divisions of Wisconsin; adult flight periods and statuses within the state are also reported. Examples of Wisconsin’s diverse native habitat types in each of the natural divisions have been systematically inventoried, and species associated with specialized habitats such as peatland, prairie, barrens and dunes are listed. INTRODUCTION This list is an updated version of the Wisconsin moth checklist by Ferge & Balogh (2000). A considerable amount of new information from has been accumulated in the 18 years since that initial publication. Over sixty species have been added, bringing the total to 1284 in the thirteen families comprising this checklist. These families are estimated to comprise approximately one-half of the state’s total moth fauna. Historical records of Wisconsin moths are relatively meager. Checklists including Wisconsin moths were compiled by Hoy (1883), Rauterberg (1900), Fernekes (1906) and Muttkowski (1907). Hoy's list was restricted to Racine County, the others to Milwaukee County. Records from these publications are of historical interest, but unfortunately few verifiable voucher specimens exist. Unverifiable identifications and minimal label data associated with older museum specimens limit the usefulness of this information. Covell (1970) compiled records of 222 Geometridae species, based on his examination of specimens representing at least 30 counties. -
Centaurea Stoebe Ssp. Micranthos
Species: Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/cenmac/all.html SPECIES: Centaurea maculosa Introductory Distribution and occurrence Management Considerations Botanical and ecological characteristics Fire ecology Fire effects References INTRODUCTORY SPECIES: Centaurea maculosa AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION FEIS ABBREVIATION SYNONYMS NRCS PLANT CODE COMMON NAMES TAXONOMY LIFE FORM FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS OTHER STATUS AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION: Zouhar, Kris. 2001. Centaurea maculosa. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2007, September 24]. FEIS ABBREVIATION: CENMAC SYNONYMS: Centaurea biebersteinii DC. [82] Centaurea stoebe L. ssp. micranthos (Gugler) Hayek [137] NRCS PLANT CODE [212]: CEBI2 1 of 58 9/24/2007 4:04 PM Species: Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/cenmac/all.html COMMON NAMES: spotted knapweed TAXONOMY: The scientific name for spotted knapweed is Centaurea maculosa Lam. (Asteraceae) [45,67,217,233]. Oschmann [137] suggests that in North America, the name Centaurea maculosa has been misapplied to Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos. The taxonomy of spotted knapweed is discussed in Ochsmann [137] and on the Centaurea website. Oschsmann [136] also cites evidence of hybridization between spotted and diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) in at least 7 U.S. states. The hybrid is named Centaurea × psammogena Gayer. LIFE FORM: Forb FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS: No special status OTHER STATUS: Spotted knapweed has been declared a noxious or restricted weed in at least 15 states in the U.S. and 4 Canadian provinces [213]. -
Pitcher's Thistle (Cirsium Pitcheri) Monitoring Activities in Michigan
Pitcher’s Thistle (Cirsium pitcheri) Monitoring Activities in Michigan Tameka Dandridge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Patty O’Connell and Sarah Stephens, U.S. Forest Service (USFS) The Pitcher’s thistle became federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, in July 1988. It is endemic to the unforested dune systems of the western Great Lakes and requires active sand dune processes to maintain its early to mid-successional habitat. Shoreline development, recreation, dune stabilization, and invasive plants and insects are primary threats to the species. The Pitcher’s thistle was monitored at eight sites in 1993, 1996 and 2001 in the Manistee National Forest (MNF) and at P.J. Hoffmaster State Park (Hoffmaster) in 2004 and 2006. P.J. Hoffmaster State Park Manistee National Forest USFWS counted and USFS monitored Pitcher’s recorded each Pitcher’s thistle at 8 sites within the thistle plant according to an Cadillac-Manistee Ranger unofficial age class District of the Manistee (seedling, small juvenile, National Forest. Eight large juvenile, adult) permanent baseline transects designation within 9 sites at were established with the park. Further counts randomly placed transects at are required to determine Manistee Co. each site. Contiguous 5m x 5m any population changes. sampling plots were placed along the random transects to Muskegon Co. assess population trends, associated plant species and threats. Pitcher's Thistle Seedlings Total Pitcher's Thistle Plants By Year 400 5000 Total Pitcher's